Preview

THE EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE OF BRIDGE PILE FOUNDATIONS TO
LIQUEFACTION INDUCED LATERAL SPREAD DISPLACEMENT DEMANDS
by
Sharid Khan Amiri
W
________________________________________________________________
IE
A Dissertation Presented to the
EV
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
PR
(CIVIL ENGINEERING)
December 2008
Copyright 2008 Sharid Khan Amiri

UMI Number: 3355171
Copyright 2008 by
Amiri, Sharid Khan
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO USERS
W
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
IE
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
EV
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
PR
______________________________________________________________
UMI Microform 3355171

Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
_______________________________________________________________
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346
DEDICATION
To my beloved parents who never stopped believing in me, for all their incredible
support throughout the years and to all the people who refuse to give up their dreams
for advancement of science for the benefit of humankind.
W
IE
EV
PR
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes first to express his utmost gratitude to his advisor, Dr.Geoffrey
Martin, for his mentorship, friendship, guidance and support. His invaluable
knowledge and professional attitude made the long journey possible, the quest of
knowledge exciting and a dream become reality. The author is also grateful for the
helpful suggestions of his dissertation committee members. The support and
suggestions of my professional colleagues in Caltrans throughout the research are
also greatly appreciated. Finally, I want to thank my beloved wife for all her sacrifice
W
and support.
IE
EV
PR
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication …………………………………………………………………….. ii
Acknowledgments …………………………………………………………… iii
List of Tables ………………………………………………………………….. v
List of Figures …………………………………………………………………. vii
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………... xix
Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 1
Chapter 2: Liquefaction Induced Lateral Spread Case Histories ……………... 8
W
Chapter 3: Evaluation of Liquefaction Induced Lateral Spread ……………… 68
Chapter 4: Modeling Concepts for Piles Subject to Lateral Spread …………. 103
IE
Chapter 5: Recommended NCHRP 12-49 Design Approach ……………….. 143
Chapter 6: Caltrans Design Approach ………………………………………. 167

EV
Chapter 7: Development of Improved Design Methodology ……………….. 195
Chapter 8: Design Examples, Pile Types and Sensitivity Studies ………….. 302
PR
Chapter 9: Summary & Conclusions ……………………………………….. 383
References …………………………………………………………………… 387
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5-1: Pile Information (Missouri Bridge) ……………………………….. 158
Table 5-2: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Missouri Bridge

(NCHRP, 2003) ………………………………………………………………. 159
Table 5-3: Foundation Table ………………………………………………….. 162
Table 5-4: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Washington Bridge

(NCHRP, 2003) ……………………………………………………………….. 165
Table 5-5: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Washington Bridge

(NCHRP, 2003) ……………………………………………………………….. 165
Table 7-1: Blandon’s Pile Prestressed Section Material Properties
W
(Blandon, 2007) ………………………………………………………………… 207
Table 7-2: Plastic Hinging in Blandon’s Model Pile Response (Blandon, 2007).. 209
IE
Table 7-3: Pile Curvature at Plastic Hinges and Failure Points: Pile Simulation
for Blandon’s Pile ……………………………………………………………….. 215
EV
Table 7-4: Newmark Analysis Results for Missouri Bridge, (475 Year Event),
Pier 4 …………………………………………………………………………….. 219
Table 7-5: Pile Shear Force, Pier 4, (475 Year Event), Missouri Bridge ……….. 221
PR
Table 7-6: Newmark Analysis Results For Missouri Bridge, (2,475 Year Event),
Pier 4 ……………………………………………………………………………. 230
Table 7-7: Pile Shear Force, Pier 4, (2,475 Year Event), Missouri Bridge …….. 232
Table 7-8: Newmark Analysis Results for Washington Bridge,(475 Year Event),
Pier 6 ……………………………………………………………………………. 242
Table 7-9: Pile Shear Force, Upper Liquefiable Layer, (475 Year Event),
Washington Bridge ……………………………………………………………… 244
Table 7-10: Pile Shear Force, Pier 6, (475 Year Event), Washington Bridge ….. 248
Table 7-11: Pile Shear Force, Pier 5, (475 Year Event), Washington Bridge ….. 249
v
Table 7-12: Newmark Analysis Results for Washington Bridge,
(475 Year Event), Piers 5 and 6 ………………………………………………. 250

(2,475 Year Event), Pier 6 ……………………………………………………... 263
Table 7-14: Pile Shear Force for Washington Bridge, (2,475 Year Event),
Pier 6 …………………………………………………………………………… 264
Table 7-15: Pile Shear Force, Pier 5, (2,475 Year Event), Pier 5 ……………… 267
Table 7-16: Pile Shear Force, Pier 6, (2,475 Year Event), Washington Bridge .. 268

(2,475 Year Event) Piers 5 and 6 ……………………………………………….. 269
W
Table 8-1: Pile Shear Forces (Design Example I) ……………………………… 308
Table 8-2: Newmark Analysis (Design Example I) ……………………………. 309

IE
Table 8-3: Pile Shear Forces (Design Example II) …………………………….. 323
Table 8-4: Newmark Analysis (Design Example II) …………………………... 324

EV
Table 8-5: Pile Shear Forces (Design Example III) ……………………………. 336
Table 8-6: Newmark Analysis (Design Example III) ………………………….. 338

PR
Table 8-7: Pile Shear Forces (Design Example IV) …………………………… 354
Table 8-8: Newmark Analysis (Design Example IV) …………………………. 355
Table 8-9: Summary of the Design Examples Bridge Piles Performance …….. 382
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Great Alaska Earthquake Location Map …………………………….. 9
Figure 2-2: Construction of and damage to Twenty Mile River Bridge ………… 13
Figure 2-3: Log of Test Boring For Twenty Mile River Bridge ……………….. 14
Figure 2-4: Steel-Girder Highway Bridge Collapse …………………………….. 15
Figure 2-5: Railroad Approach Damage Due to River Bank Movement ……….. 16
Figure 2-6: Railroad Approach Damage Due to River Bank Movement ……….. 17
Figure 2-7: Span Collapse, Million Dollar Bridge, Copper River Highway ……. 17
Figure 2-8: Temporary Bridging of Million Dollar Bridge, Copper River

Highway …………………………………………………………………………. 18
W
Figure 2-9: Damage to Railroad and Highway Bridge areas on Twenty Mile
River ……………………………………………………………………………... 19
IE
Figure 2-10: Relative Speed of Pacific and Australian Plates …………………… 21
Figure 2-11: Edgecumbe Fault …………………………………………………... 22

EV
Figure 2-12: Location of Whakatane within New Zealand ……………………… 23
Figure 2-13: Edgecumbe Regional Map ………………………………………… 25
Figure 2-14: Cross Section at Landing Load Bridge showing the estimated
Liquefied Strata ………………………………………………………………….. 25
PR
Figure 2-15: Potential Collapse Mechanism for Landing Load Bridge …………. 28
Figure 2-16: Tectonic Setting of Kobe Earthquake ……………………………... 30
Figure 2-17: Map of observed horizontal peak acceleration ……………………. 31
Figure 2-18: Geological Setting of Osaka Bay Region …………………………. 32
Figure 2-19: Faulting near or around Kobe ……………………………………... 33
Figure 2-20: Alluvial fans near or around Kobe ………………………………… 34
Figure 2-21: Subsurface geology near or around Kobe …………………………. 34
Figure 2-22: Highway System in the Osaka-Kobe District ……………………… 36
vii
Figure 2-23: Uozakihama Bridge Pier 211: (a) Side view of the pier and
plan view of the foundation; (b) Observed damage to piles ……………….. 38
Figure 2-24: In-Situ Investigation, Uozakihama Bridge Pier 211 …………. 40
Figure 2-25: Ground Displacements in the South part of Uozakihama Island.. 41
Figure 2-26: Physical Map of the Philippines, Showing Topography and Major
Philippines Fault System …………………………………………………….. 43
Figure 2-27: City area of Dagupan affected by liquefaction ………………… 45
Figure 2-28: Map of Central Part of Luzon showing the region affected by the
July 16, 1990 Earthquake and Locations of Liquefaction …………………… 46
Figure 2-29: Sketch of Magsaysay Bridge Damage during the 1990 Luzon
Earthquake …………………………………………………………………… 47
W
Figure 2-30: Side Views of Magsaysay Bridge Before and After Earthquake . 48
Figure 2-31: Lateral Flow along the River Side ……………………………… 49

IE
Figure 2-32: Meandering Patterns of Old and Present River Channels ……… 50
Figure 2-33: Soil Profile along Major Streets ………………………………... 52

EV
Figure 2-34: Lateral Spreading of Right Bank which pushed the wooden house
into river ……………………………………………………………………… 53
Figure 2-35: Epicenter and Seismic Intensity of 1964 Niigata Earthquake ….. 55
Figure 2-36: Permanent horizontal ground displacements in Niigata City during

PR
the 1964 Niigata earthquake ………………………………………………….. 56
Figure 2-37: Showa Bridge Collapse ………………………………………… 57
Figure 2-38: Collapse of Showa Bridge during the Niigata Earthquake …….. 58
Figure 2-39: Showa Bridge Foundation’s Lateral Movement ……………….. 59
Figure 2-40: Damage to Steel Pipe Piles of Pier P4 of Showa Bridge ………. 60
Figure 2-41: Damage to Retaining Wall of Access Road of Showa Bridge …. 61
Figure 2-42: Damage to the Abutments and Piers of Yachiyo Bridge on the
Left Bank …………………………………………………………………….. 62
Figure 2-43: Damage to the Abutments and Piers of Yachiyo Bridge on the
Left Bank ……………………………………………………………………... 63
viii
Figure 2-44: Permanent Ground Displacement at Niigata Station and its
Surroundings ………………………………………………………………….. 64
Figure 2-45: Collapse of the East Bridge over Railway ………………………. 65
Figure 2-46: Horizontal Ground Displacement in the Vicinity of the East Bridge
over Railway ………………………………………………………………….. 66
Figure 3-1: Empirical Relationship between the Cyclic Stress Ratio Initiating
Liquefaction and (N1)60 Values for Silty Sands in M 7.5 Earthquakes ……….. 70
Figure 3-2: Magnitude Scaling Factors Derived by Various Investigators …… 71
Figure 3-3: Minimum Values for Kσ Recommended for Clean Sands, Silty
Sands and Gravels ……………………………………………………………... 73
Figure 3-4: Correction Factors Kα for Static Shear Ratios α ………………….. 74
W
Figure 3-5: Normalized CPT Soil Behavior Type Chart ……………………… 76
Figure 3-6: Recommended Cyclic Resistance Ratio (CRR) for Clean Sands
under Level Ground Conditions Based on CPT ………………………………. 77
IE
Figure 3-7: Normalized Residual Strength Plotted Against Plasticity Index … 83
Figure 3-8: Charts Relating (a) Normalized Standard Penetration Resistance

EV
(N1)60; and (b) Residual Shear Strength Sr to Vertical Effective Overburden
Pressure σvo’, for Saturated Non-gravelly Silt-Sand Deposits that have
Experienced Large Deformations …………………………………………….. 85
Figure 3-9: Undrained Critical Strength Ratio versus Equivalent Clean Sand
Blow Count …………………………………………………………………... 88
PR
Figure 3-10: Recommended Fines Correction for Estimating of Residual

Undrained …………………………………………………………………….. 89
Figure 3-11: A Comparison of Liquefied Strength Ratio Relationships Based

on Normalized CPT Tip Resistance …………………………………………. 90
Figure 3-12: Relationship between Residual Strength and Corrected SPT

Resistance ……………………………………………………………………. 92
Figure 3-13: Recommended Fines Correction for Estimation of Residual

Undrained Strength …………………………………………………………… 93
Figure 3-14: Newmark Analogy ……………………………………………… 94
Figure 3-15: Forces Acting on a Block Resting on an Inclined Plane (a) Static
Conditions (b) Dynamic Conditions ………………………………………….. 95
ix
Figure 3-16: Variation of pseudo-static factor of safety with horizontal
pseudo-static coefficient for block on plane inclined at 20 degree ……………. 96
Figure 3-17: Zero Displacement for ay/amax =1 ………………………………... 97
Figure 3-18: Computed displacement for relatively high and low yield
acceleration …………………………………………………………………….. 97
Figure 3-19: Mean Permanent Displacement for Different Magnitudes of

Earthquakes (Soil Sites) ………………………………………………………… 99
Figure 3-20: Simplified Displacement Chart for velocity-acceleration ratio of 30 .101
Figure 3-21: Simplified Displacement Chart for velocity-acceleration ratio of 60 .101
Figure 4-1: Earth Pressure Considered in the 1996 JRA Design Specifications … 104
Figure 4-2: The Seismic Deformation Model ……………………………………. 106
W
Figure 4-3: Model for Pile under Lateral Loading With p-y Curves …………….. 108
Figure 4-4: Distribution of Unit Stresses Against A Pile Before and After
IE
Lateral Deflection ………………………………………………………………... 109
Figure 4-5: Element form beam-column ………………………………………… 111

EV
Figure 4-6: Representation of Deflected Pile ……………………………………. 113
Figure 4-7: Soil Resistance versus the Pile Deflection for a Given Soil
Movement ……………………………………………………………………….. 116
Figure 4-8: Pile Response Due to Relative Soil Movement …………………….. 117
PR
Figure 4-9: Definition of Ductility ……………………………………………… 121
Figure 4-10: Moment Curvature Analysis for Circular Column ……………….. 122
Figure 4-11: Moment Curvature Analysis for Rectangular Column …………… 124
Figure 4-12: Concrete Stress Strain Model …………………………………….. 126
Figure 4-13: Steel Stress Strain Model …………………………………………. 127
Figure 4-14: Centrifuge Modeling Concept ……………………………………. 129
Figure 4-15: RPI Centrifuge (3.0 m radius and 100 g-tonnes) ………………… 130
Figure 4-16: UC Davis Centrifuge (9.1 m radius and 240 g-tonnes) ………….. 130
Figure 4-17: Centrifuge Model Setup …………………………………………. 137
x
Figure 4-18: Centrifuge Model Setup …………………………………………. 138
Figure 5-1: Movement of the Slope due to Lateral Spread ……………………. 149
Figure 5-2: Movement of Liquefiable Soil Passed Pile or Drilled Shaft ………. 150
Figure 5-3: Movement of Liquefiable Soil with Crust with Pile or Drilled Shaft .151
Figure 5-4: Methodology for Lateral Spread Impact Assessment and Design
For Bridges ……………………………………………………………………… 154
Figure 5-5: Missouri Bridge Configuration …………………………………….. 157
Figure 5.6: Washington Bridge Configuration …………………………………. 161
Figure 5.7: Washington Bridge Site Subsurface Profile ……………………….. 164
Figure 6-1: Displacement Ductility Demand ………………………………….. 176
W
Figure 6-2: Types of Pile Shafts ……………………………………………….. 178
Figure 6-3: Moment Curvature Diagram Idealized ……………………………. 179

IE
Figure 6-4: Local Displacement Capacity-Cantilever Column w/Fixed Base … 181
Figure 6-5: Local Displacement Capacity-Framed Column w/Fixed-Fixed ….. 182

EV
Figure 6-6: Local Ductility Assessment ………………………………………. 184
Figure 6-7: Steel Stress Strain Model ………………………………………… 186
Figure 6-8: Concrete Stress Strain Model ……………………………………. 187

PR
Figure 6-9: Lateral Spreading Force on Piles ………………………………… 190
Figure 6-10: Plastic Hinging Along Caltrans Pile Shafts …………………….. 191
Figure 7-1: Plastic Mechanism for an Integral Abutment Supported on Piles .. 197
Figure 7-2: Pile Pinning Effect Based on Displacement Compatibility ……… 200
Figure 7-3: Soil Movement due to Lateral Spread …………………………… 201
Figure 7-4: Pile Model Setup ………………………………………………… 205
Figure 7-5: Transverse Section of Prestressed Pile ………………………….. 206
Figure 7-6: Pile Moment Curvature …………………………………………. 208
Figure 7-7: Blandon’s Model Pile Response (Bending Moment & Shear) ….. 210
xi
Figure 7-8: Blandon’s Model Pile Response (Curvature & Displacement) …….. 211
Figure 7-9: Curvature Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile ………………… 211
Figure 7-10: Bending Moment Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile ………. 212
Figure 7-11: Shear Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile …………………… 212
Figure 7-12: Curvature Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile ……………… 212
Figure 7-13: Bending Moment Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile ……… 213
Figure 7-14: Shear Response Simulation for Blandon’s Pile …………………… 213
Figure 7-15: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 4, (475 YEAR EVENT) Missouri
Bridge …………………………………………………………………………… 223
Figure 7-16: Lateral Pile Response, Missouri Bridge, (475 YEAR EVENT)
W
Pier 4 ……………………………………………………………………………. 224
Figure 7-17: Lateral Pile Response, Missouri Bridge, (475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 4 ……………………………………………………………………………. 224
IE
Figure 7-18: Plastic Hinge Location along the Pile, Missouri Bridge Pier 4 …… 225
Figure 7-19: Location of the Maximum Bending Moment and Estimated Plastic
EV
Hinge Distance for Piles, pier 4, (475 YEAR EVENT) Missouri Bridge ………. 226
Figure 7-20: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 4, (2,475 YEAR EVENT) Missouri
Bridge …………………………………………………………………………… 234
Figure 7-21: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 4, (2,475 YEAR EVENT), (Martin
PR
and Qiu) Missouri Bridge ………………………………………………………. 234
Figure 7-22: Lateral Pile Response, Missouri Bridge, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 4 ……………………………………………………………………………. 235
Figure 7-23: Lateral Pile Response, Missouri Bridge, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 4 …………………………………………………………………………… 235
Figure 7-24: Plastic Hinge Location along the Pile, Missouri Bridge, Pier 4 ….. 237
Hinge Distance for Piles, pier 4, (2,475 YEAR EVENT) Missouri Bridge …… 238
Figure 7-26: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 6, (475 YEAR EVENT) Washington
Bridge ………………………………………………………………………….. 246
Figure 7-27: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 6, (475 YEAR EVENT), (Martin and
Qiu) Washington Bridge ……………………………………………………… 246
xii
Figure 7-28: Pinning Effect on Piles, Piers 5 and 6, (475 YEAR EVENT)
Washington Bridge …………………………………………………………… 251
Figure 7-29: Pinning Effect on Piles, Piers 5 and 6, (475 YEAR EVENT),
(Martin and Qiu) Washington Bridge ………………………………….……… 251
Figure 7-30: Lateral Pile Response, Washington Bridge, (475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 6 …………………………………………………………………….…….. 252
Figure 7-31: Lateral Pile Response, Washington Bridge, (475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 6 …………………………………………………………………………… 252
Figure 7-32: Plastic Hinge Location along the Pile, Washington Bridge, Pier 6 . 254
Hinge Distance for Piles, pier 6, (475 YEAR EVENT) Washington Bridge …... 255
Figure 7-34: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 6, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
W
Figure 7-35: Pinning Effect on Piles, Pier 6, (2,475 YEAR EVENT), (Martin
and Qiu) Washington Bridge ……………………………………………………. 265
IE
Figure 7-36: Pinning Effect on Piles, Piers 5 and 6, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
EV
Figure 7-37: Pinning Effect on Piles, Piers 5 and 6, (2,475 YEAR EVENT),
(Martin and Qiu) Washington Bridge …………………………………………… 270
Figure 7-38: Lateral Pile Response, Washington Bridge, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 6 …………………………………………………………………………….. 271
PR
Figure 7-39: Lateral Pile Response, Washington Bridge, (2,475 YEAR EVENT)
Pier 6 …………………………………………………………………………….. 271
Figure 7-40: Plastic Hinge Location along the Pile, Washington Bridge, Pier 6 .. 273
Hinge Distance for Piles, pier 6, (2,475 YEAR EVENT) Washington Bridge ….. 274
Figure 7-42: NCHRP and Results from Improved Methodology ………………... 276
Figure 7-43: Landing Road Bridge, Whakatane, New Zealand ………………… 278
Figure 7-44: Landing Road Bridge Looking South West ……………………….. 279
Figure 7-45: Laterally Spreading Cracks and Sand Boils on the True Left Bank .. 281
Figure 7-46: Pile Collapse Mechanism, Landing Road Bridge ………………….. 282
xiii
Figure 7-47: Moment Curvature Diagram for Landing Road Bridge Piles ……. 283
Figure 7-48: Curvature Demand for Landing Road Bridge Piles ……………… 284
Figure 7-49: Bending Moment along the Piles for Landing Road Bridge …….. 285
Figure 7-50: Curvature Demand for Landing Road Bridge Piles ……………… 285
Figure 7-51: Bending Moment along the Piles for Landing Road Bridge …….. 286
Figure 7-52: Excavation of Pier C …………………………………………….. 287
Figure 7-53: Area Map of the Uozakihama Island ……………………………. 289
Figure 7-54: Uozakihama Bridge Structure and Foundation Configuration ….. 290
Figure 7-55: Lateral Spreading at/or around Uozakihama Bridge ……………. 291
W
Figure 7-56: Soil Underlying the Footing at Uozakihama Bridge …………… 292
Figure 7-57: Moment Curvature Diagram for Uozakihama Bridge Piles ……. 293
IE
Figure 7-58: Curvature Demand for Uozakihama Bridge Piles ……………… 294
EV
Figure 7-61: Pile Damage Observed During Field Observation (Uozakihama

Bridge) ……………………………………………………………………….. 297
PR
Figure 7-62: Damage Observed At the Pile Discontinuities (Uozakihama

Bridge) ……………………………………………………………………….. 298
Figure 7-63: Damage Survey of Piles, Uozakihama Bridge ………………… 298
Figure 7-64: Damage Survey of Piles, Uozakihama Bridge ………………… 298
Figure 7-65: Chart for Improved Methodology for Lateral Spread Impact
Assessment and Design for Bridges …………………………………………. 299
Figure 8-1: Bridge Abutment Gross Stability during Earthquake (Design

Example I) ……………………………………………………………………. 306
Figure 8-2: Pile Pinning Effect (Design Example I) ………………………… 310
Figure 8-3: Pile Moment-Curvature Diagram (Design Example I) …………. 311
xiv
Figure 8-4: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example I) ………………….. 312
Figure 8-5: Pile Moment Response (Design Example I) ……………………. 312
Figure 8-7: Pile Moment Response (Design Example I) ……………………. 313
Figure 8-10: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example I) ………………… 316
W
Figure 8-13: Pile Curvature Demand Based on Liquefiable Layer Thickness
(Design Example I) ………………………………………………………….. 318

IE
(Design Example I) ………………………………………………………….. 318
Figure 8-15: Bridge Bent Gross Stability during Earthquake (Design

Example II) ………………………………………………………………….. 321
EV
Figure 8-16: Pile Pinning Effect (Design Example II) ……………………… 325
Figure 8-17: Pile Moment-Curvature Diagram (Design Example II) ………. 326
Figure 8-18: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example II) ……………….. 327
PR
Figure 8-19: Pile Moment Response (Design Example II) …………………. 327
Figure 8-20: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example II) ……………….. 328
Figure 8-21: Pile Moment Response (Design Example II) ………………… 328
Figure 8-22: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example II) ………………. 329
xv
(Design Example II) …………………………………………………….332

(Design Example II) ……………………………………………………. 333
Figure 8-29: Pile Pinning Effect (Design Example III) ………………… 339
Figure 8-30: Pile Moment-Curvature Diagram (Design Example III) …. 340
Figure 8-31: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III) …………… 340
Figure 8-32: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example III) ……………341
Figure 8-33: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example III) …………… 342
Figure 8-34: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III) ……………. 343
W
Figure 8-36: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III) …………….. 344
IE
Figure 8-38: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III) …………….. 345
EV
Figure 8-41: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example III) …………... 346
PR
Figure 8-43: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example III) ………….. 347
Figure 8-44: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III) …………… 348
Figure 8-45: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example III) ………….. 348
Figure 8-46: Pile Moment Response (Design Example III)……………. 349

(Design Example III) …………………………………………………… 349
Figure 8-48: Bridge Bent Gross Stability during Earthquake (Design

Example IV) ……………………………………………………………. 352
Figure 8-49: Pile Pinning Effect (Design Example IV) ………………… 356
xvi
Figure 8-50: Pile Moment-Curvature Diagram (Design Example IV) …… 357
Figure 8-51: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example IV) …………….. 358
Figure 8-52: Pile Moment Response (Design Example IV) ………………. 358
Figure 8-58: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example IV) ……………. 362
W
IE

(Design Example IV) ……………………………………………………... 365
EV
(Design Example IV) ……………………………………………………... 365
Figure 8-64: Bridge Abutment Gross Stability during Earthquake (Design

Example V) ……………………………………………………………….. 368
PR
Figure 8-65: Pile Moment-Curvature Diagram (Design Example V) ……. 369
Figure 8-66: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) …………….. 370
Figure 8-67: Pile Moment Response (Design Example V) ……………… 371
Figure 8-68: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) ……………. 371
Figure 8-73: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) …………… 375
xvii
Figure 8-74: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) ………………. 376
Figure 8-75: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) ……………….. 376
Figure 8-76: Pile Curvature Response (Design Example V) ……………….. 377

(Design Example V) ………………………………………………………… 378

(Design Example V) ………………………………………………………… 378
W
IE
EV
PR
xviii
ABSTRACT
The earthquake response of various types of pile foundations supporting a
variety of bridge structures to liquefaction induced lateral spread displacement
demands is analyzed using the concepts of pile ductility and pile pinning. The
soil/pile model uses the stress-strain response of reinforced concrete and steel,
incorporating both the axial and lateral loads for structural elements, and p-y curves
to represent interface elements to assess the pile response during earthquake induced
lateral spread displacement demands.
W
The analysis approach is incorporated in an improved design methodology
using concepts documented in the FHWA “Recommended LRFD Guidelines for the
IE
Seismic Design of Highway Bridges (2003)”.
Case studies of earthquake events, during which lateral spread displacement

EV
has caused damage to the bridge pile foundations are revisited to examine the
response of these piles using the methodology developed in the research.

PR
Design examples of several bridges supported by various types of pile
foundations are also presented and the pile response in terms of plastic hinge
development, pile ductility ratio and pile curvature response are studied. It is shown
using the methodology developed in this research that given the subsurface
conditions, the liquefaction and lateral spread potential and the structural details of
the piles at a given bridge site, one can reasonably assess how close the pile is to
acceptable ductility levels in plastic hinge zones. The method also provides a robust
xix
approach to screen for the acceptability of existing bridge pile foundations subject to
lateral spread during present day design earthquakes.
W
IE
EV
PR
xx
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Bridge pile foundations for ordinary bridges have often been designed in the past for
axial and lateral load due to static loading. With an emphasis on designing bridge
structures that would “perform” adequately in California during a maximum credible
design earthquake, major research was conducted after the bridge failures during the
1989 Loma Prieta and 1994 Northridge earthquakes, to focus on performance based
bridge design. Ductility based design for the superstructure and substructure
W
components of bridges began in the mid-1990’s. However, bridge pile foundations
were capacity protected and were designed based on a force/capacity approach.

IE
EV
During the same time period, designers began focusing their attention on impact of
“problematic” soils (i.e. liquefiable and soft soil) on the design of the bridge pile
foundations. Bridge pile foundations in liquefiable soil were designed to remain

PR
elastic and not undergo any yielding and pile/liquefiable soils were modeled to
achieve one objective and that is the deflection allowed at the top of the pile. This is
in effect a constraint made by the bridge structure designer to accomplish his goal
which is the allowable deflection of the bridge structure.
During the same period, inertia loading by the structure only was included into
design of the bridge pile foundations and the phenomenon of lateral spreading and its
impact on the design of the bridge pile foundations was not included since the
1
researchers did not have a clear understanding of the mechanics of the problem and
there was no specific design approach to tackle the phenomenon.
In the last 10 years, major steps towards an understanding the behavior of the bridge
pile foundations in laterally spreading soil have been accomplished. The emphasis
has been in modeling the soil behavior in liquefiable soil and study the loading
behavior of the laterally spreading soil on the piles. However, no major quantitative
study had been performed into ductile behavior of the bridge piles in laterally
W
spreading soil, which is the focal point of this study.
IE
The lack of design guidance and quantitative information related to bridge pile
foundation design in seismic zones and specifically in California has led designers to
EV
design piles elastically. In addition, the design approach has been to insure the piles
do not form plastic hinges, simply because designers and owners do not want pile
PR
damage since it is not directly observable.
However, ductile behavior of bridge pile foundations in laterally spreading soil is
acceptable for the following reasons:
1. Piles behaving inelastically would make the entire foundation system more
flexible, which in turn could lead to an increase in earthquake energy
dissipation and a potential reduction in the adverse impact of the earthquake
on the bridge structure.
2
2. Analyses of pile inelastic behavior would allow the engineer to control the
amount of plastic deformation of the pile structure to avoid significant pile
damage.
3. The ductile analyses of piles provides the engineer with information required
to design the transverse reinforcement.
4. A ductile displacement based design approach for bridge pile foundations is a
better indicator of pile damage than a force based approach.
5. Ductile design of piles in laterally spreading soil provides a unified approach
W
in seismic design that is rational and leads to an improved representation of
the system response to earthquakes.

IE
The objective of this research is to fundamentally study the ductile behavior of
bridge piles and their response in laterally spreading soil and to improve the design
EV
methodology of pile foundations. It is important to note here that the impact of the
seismic loading due to kinematic displacement demands and not inertia loading from
PR
bridge structures is studied. The role of inertia on the pile response is a separate
phenomenon and is not considered in this study. To provide a framework for
selecting and incorporating a meaningful and quantifiable performance criteria for
bridge pile foundations from both a geotechnical and structural point of view, one
needs to study the pile ductile response and related pile/soil interaction during lateral
spread. The starting point for the research was the design guidelines documented in a
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report (2003) which
provided an initial framework for a ductile design approach.

Preview

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Preview

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

THE EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE OF BRIDGE PILE FOUNDATIONS TO

LIQUEFACTION INDUCED LATERAL SPREAD DISPLACEMENT DEMANDS

Sharid Khan Amiri

Copyright 2008 Sharid Khan Amiri

All rights reserved

UMI Microform 3355171

for advancement of science for the benefit of humankind.

helpful suggestions of his dissertation committee members. The support and

suggestions of my professional colleagues in Caltrans throughout the research are

Acknowledgments …………………………………………………………… iii

List of Tables ………………………………………………………………….. v

List of Figures …………………………………………………………………. vii

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………... xix

Chapter 1: Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 1

Chapter 2: Liquefaction Induced Lateral Spread Case Histories ……………... 8

Chapter 6: Caltrans Design Approach ………………………………………. 167

Chapter 7: Development of Improved Design Methodology ……………….. 195

Chapter 9: Summary & Conclusions ……………………………………….. 383

References …………………………………………………………………… 387

Table 5-1: Pile Information (Missouri Bridge) ……………………………….. 158

Table 5-2: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Missouri Bridge

Table 5-3: Foundation Table ………………………………………………….. 162

Table 5-4: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Washington Bridge

Table 5-5: Engineering Characteristics of Subsurface Soil at Washington Bridge

Table 7-1: Blandon’s Pile Prestressed Section Material Properties

Table 7-13: Newmark Analysis Results for Washington Bridge,

Table 7-17: Newmark Analysis Results for Washington Bridge,

Table 8-2: Newmark Analysis (Design Example I) ……………………………. 309

Table 8-4: Newmark Analysis (Design Example II) …………………………... 324

Table 8-6: Newmark Analysis (Design Example III) ………………………….. 338

Table 8-8: Newmark Analysis (Design Example IV) …………………………. 355

Figure 2-1: Great Alaska Earthquake Location Map …………………………….. 9

Figure 2-4: Steel-Girder Highway Bridge Collapse …………………………….. 15

Figure 2-8: Temporary Bridging of Million Dollar Bridge, Copper River

Figure 2-11: Edgecumbe Fault …………………………………………………... 22

Figure 2-13: Edgecumbe Regional Map ………………………………………… 25

Figure 2-16: Tectonic Setting of Kobe Earthquake ……………………………... 30

Figure 2-17: Map of observed horizontal peak acceleration ……………………. 31

Figure 2-18: Geological Setting of Osaka Bay Region …………………………. 32

Figure 2-19: Faulting near or around Kobe ……………………………………... 33

Figure 2-20: Alluvial fans near or around Kobe ………………………………… 34

Figure 2-21: Subsurface geology near or around Kobe …………………………. 34

Figure 2-22: Highway System in the Osaka-Kobe District ……………………… 36

Figure 2-24: In-Situ Investigation, Uozakihama Bridge Pier 211 …………. 40

Figure 2-25: Ground Displacements in the South part of Uozakihama Island.. 41

Figure 2-27: City area of Dagupan affected by liquefaction ………………… 45

Figure 2-31: Lateral Flow along the River Side ……………………………… 49

Figure 2-33: Soil Profile along Major Streets ………………………………... 52

Figure 2-36: Permanent horizontal ground displacements in Niigata City during

the 1964 Niigata earthquake ………………………………………………….. 56

Figure 2-37: Showa Bridge Collapse ………………………………………… 57

Figure 2-39: Showa Bridge Foundation’s Lateral Movement ……………….. 59

Figure 2-41: Damage to Retaining Wall of Access Road of Showa Bridge …. 61

Figure 2-45: Collapse of the East Bridge over Railway ………………………. 65

Figure 3-2: Magnitude Scaling Factors Derived by Various Investigators …… 71

Figure 3-4: Correction Factors Kα for Static Shear Ratios α ………………….. 74

Figure 3-8: Charts Relating (a) Normalized Standard Penetration Resistance

Figure 3-10: Recommended Fines Correction for Estimating of Residual

Figure 3-11: A Comparison of Liquefied Strength Ratio Relationships Based

Figure 3-12: Relationship between Residual Strength and Corrected SPT

Figure 3-13: Recommended Fines Correction for Estimation of Residual

Figure 3-14: Newmark Analogy ……………………………………………… 94